Will Teachers Refuse to Administer Common Core Assesssments? Garfield Teachers Might Pave the Way for More Teachers to Say "NO".

Will teachers say "NO" to the Common Core assessments caused by "crises" fabricated by private interests?

Will Missouri teachers (and teachers from other states) stand up to the increased Common Core standardized assessments and begin to refuse the avalanche of testing required?  They can take a page from the playbook of teachers in Seattle who are saying "no" to testing.   From The Underground Parent:

****************************************************************************

The Garfield Stand and the Common Core: Will They Both Come to a School Near You?

The “Garfield Stand” may eventually come to a school near you following the roll out of the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) and related assessment implementation across the country.  What is the Garfield Stand?  It is what the teachers at Seattle’s Garfield High School are doing---they are taking a stand on important issues related to student assessment.  You can read about it in the letter from teachers at Garfield High School and at additional links provided below.  Teachers at another school, Ballard High School, are not just in sympathy with their Garfield colleagues; they are taking the same stand.

This may be the start of our seeing the hundredth monkey phenomenon related to the CCSS and other education reform issues. Individual teachers may not be comfortable or may even be fearful of speaking out on these issues but when they realize other colleagues have similar views and concerns, collectively they may take a stand as we see at Garfield. 

Is the Garfield Stand a preview of what we may see across the country in the not to distant future as teachers have first hand classroom experience implementing top down education reform mandates?

I encourage you to read the letter from the Garfield teachers.  The Ballard teachers wrote a letter supporting their Garfield colleagues.  That letter is copied below.  In a few years how many of the statements below will have a ring of truth if MAP is replaced with SBAC or PARCC assessments?

                        25 teachers at nearby Ballard High School signed a letter against continuing to use the MAP test, and in support of our Garfield colleagues:

                         

                        Whereas

                        The MAP test is a resource expensive and cash expensive program in a district with very finite financial resources,

                        The MAP test is not used in practice to inform student instruction,

                        The MAP test is not connected to our curricula,

                        The MAP test has been repurposed by district administration to form part of a teacher’s evaluation, which is contrary to the purposes it was designed for, as stated by its purveyor, making it part of junk science,

                        The MAP test has also been repurposed for student placement in courses and programs, for which it was not designed,

                        The MAP test was purchased under corrupt crony-ist circumstances (Our former superintendent, while employed by SPS sat on the corporation board of NWEA, the purveyor of the MAP test. This was undisclosed to her employer. The initial MAP test was purchased in a no-bid, non-competitive process)

                        The MAP test was and remains unwanted and unneeded and unsolicited by SPS professional classroom educators, those who work directly with students,

                        The MAP test is not taken seriously by students, (They don’t need the results for graduation, for applications, for course credit, or any other purpose, so they routinely blow it off.)

                        The MAP test’s reported testing errors are greater than students’ expected growth,

                        The technology administration of the MAP test has serious flaws district wide which waste students’ time,

                         

                        therefore

                        We, the undersigned educators from Ballard High School do hereby support statements and actions of our colleagues at Garfield High School surrounding the MAP test. Specifically, the MAP test program throughout Seattle Public Schools ought to be shut down immediately. It has been and continues to be an embarrassing mistake. Continuing it even another day, let alone another month or year or decade, will not turn this sow’s ear into a silk purse.

I salute the teachers at Garfield and Ballard for taking a stand.  I feel it is unfortunate teachers feel the need to take such a stand.  Should they, and other teachers across the country, be making more of the decisions that will directly effect their instructional practices and their students’ education or should those decisions continue to be made by remote educrats and others at district offices, state departments of education, business and corporate offices, wealthy foundations, and Washington, D.C.?

Seattle Ballard High School teachers have followed suit: No MAP test!

http://seattleducation2010.wordpress.com/2013/01/11/seattle-ballard-high-school-teachers-have-followed-suit-no-map-test/

The letter from the teachers at Garfield High School regarding the MAP test

http://seattleducation2010.wordpress.com/2013/01/11/the-letter-from-the-teachers-at-garfield-high-school-regarding-the-map-test/

Letter of support for Garfield High School teachers from Diane Ravitch

http://seattleducation2010.wordpress.com/2013/01/11/letter-of-support-for-garfield-high-school-teachers-from-diane-ravitch/

Garfield High School teachers say “NO!” to high stakes testing

http://seattleducation2010.wordpress.com/2013/01/11/garfield-high-school-teachers-say-no-to-high-stakes-testing/

Standardized test backlash: Some Seattle teachers just say 'no'

http://news.yahoo.com/standardized-test-backlash-seattle-teachers-just-no-230447459.html

Garfield High teachers won't give required test they call flawed

http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2020106684_notest11m.html?syndication=rss

Garfield High teachers refuse to give standardized test

http://www.komonews.com/news/local/Garfield-High-teachers-refuse-to-give-MAP-test-186403421.html

Garfield High teachers refuse to administer District-mandated reading and math test

http://capitolhillseattle.com/2013/01/11/garfield-high-teachers-refuse-to-administer-district-mandated-map-test

Garfield High School teachers boycott MAP assessment test

http://www.king5.com/news/education/Garfield-High-School-teachers-boycott-MAP-test-186401601.html

National School Board Association Concerned about Unfunded Federal Mandates. Common Core Unplugged?

Common Core MANDATES: Unproven, Untested, Unconstitutional and UNDERFUNDED.  Unless you live in Missouri.  Missouri taxpayers are special.  Our common core implementation will have no additional cost.

 

Are the local school districts going to refuse to implement the Common Core mandate because of cost?  Forget that they are unproven, untested and unconstitutional...they are also severely underfunded and will cause tax increases to school districts.  The National School Board Association writes how unfunded mandates impact local districts and how this lack of funding will mean unsuccessful implementation of federal laws:

The National School Board Association’s (NSBA) President C. Ed Massey, a member of the Boone County, Ky., school board, spoke to his local Rotary Club about the need to relieve local school systems from inflexible federal laws that do not come with enough funding to successfully implement.

Massey explained the need for local school board members and other education advocates to become involved in lobbying their members of Congress in a presentation to members of the Florence, Ky. Rotary Club last week.

“A lot of congressional members just get snippets of information,” he said in a story published at the Cincinnati Enquirer’s community website. “Because they are not educators, they don’t understand the issues in depth.”

The Boone County school board and members of the Kentucky School Boards Association have recently worked with Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) on issues related to the Elementary and Secondary Education Act reauthorization.

This doesn't coincide with the information published in Missouri last year about the cost of mandates.  From "FAQ-CCSS-2-10-2011", produced by Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, 2.11.11 and now pulled off the Internet.  (Contact the Commissioner's office at comedu@dese.mo.gov to receive a copy of the entire FAQ pdf).

Q. What about cost? 

As stated earlier, the Department has not requested additional or new funding for the implementation or professional development associated with revised standards and assessments. Though the Department’s staff has been reduced significantly in the past few ears, the efficient use of technology, including webinars, teleconferences, and other tools is allowing us to communicate with stakeholders and provide support. Districts also should not have additional costs over and above their current investments in ongoing curriculum and professional development. These costs are built into current budgets and devoted to current activities related to instructional improvement. In addition, districts will be able to use the new tools and resources available to them—model curriculum, learning activities, interim and benchmark assessments—which many districts have to spend time and resources developing, or pay a vendor for now.

 Maybe the president of the NSBA remembered history and accessed the 2005 Department of Education in Virginia's study on the cost to districts to implement previous federal mandates in NCLB.  From its report on the cost of fullfilling the requirements of NCLB Act for School and the Congressional testimony provided  on the cost:

Even the federal funds that reach school districts are not immune from the administrative compliance burden. Reports from school districts provide real-life examples of the administrative burden felt from heavy-handed federal regulations. A Fairfax County, Virginia, school district, for example, noted:

―The school division lengthened the standard teacher contract from 194 days to 195 just to allow for extra [NCLB] training time. The cost of setting aside a single day to train the roughly 14,000 teachers in the division on the law‘s complex requirements is equivalent to the cost of hiring 72 additional teachers. The law also affects paraprofessionals: an extra day‘s training equates to the cost of hiring about ten additional instructional assistants. There are roughly 1,000 administrators who require training as well. A day‘s training represents the cost for four additional assistant principals. Thus, each day out of the year that is set aside to explain the law results in a missed opportunity to assign 86 instructional personnel year-round to interface directly with the community‘s children and work directly to address their academic needs.

and

In 2006, the Office of Management and Budget found that No Child Left Behind cost states an additional 7 million hours in paperwork at a cost of $141 million.


There is no difference between the training needed for NCLB and Common Core....the teachers and administrators must be taught the new standards and assessments...just like they had to when NCLB started. It is stunning to see the costs associated with NCLB in 2005 and it is even more stunning that DESE states it will cost nothing in 2012 to implement Common Core standards and the waiver just granted in Missouri. Many of these new reforms have been labelled "NCLB on steroids" and it is indefensible for bureaucrats to tell legislators, taxpayers and school districts these reforms will not cost money.

You can access the Pioneer Institute white paper detailing costs to states here.


School districts could in the past decide what assessments they wanted to use for testing and teacher evaluations. Now they have no choice. They will have to have the computers or hand held devices (provided by the school districts) for student assessments (those assessments will account for 50% of teachers' accountability calculations) because that is what is mandated.   Assessments can be done every 3 weeks. The high stakes testing will be an endless cycle.  The cost of the MAP testing was about $1.80 per student. These new assessments are projected to cost about $19.00 per student in Missouri. That's a cost to the districts.

It's time for the school boards and districts to push back and refuse to implement or even partially fund these federal mandates that will not reform education. These reforms and mandates will bankrupt districts. Look how well NCLB worked for education reform (states begged to get out of the mandates) and cost. Now the same districts are having to pay for even more onerous and costly mandates via RTTT and Common Core standards. Don't repeat the same Federal experiment twice. It won't work.

When High Stakes Testing becomes Abusive, it's Time for Parents to Keep their Children Home.

When an educational system becomes so abusive as to cause physical and/or emotional harm to children, it is a parent's duty to keep that child home from public school and find other schooling alternatives...or demand changes to school policy.

MAP testing is a terrible time of the year.  Remember our post last year about the reasons MAP is given to students?  It's not to determine the true educational knowledge of students.  It's to determine how well your child/school performs on standardized tests your child has been prepped for in practice tests and hepped up to do well in pep rallies:

The MAP test is used to determine how the school is performing. Results of the test will not determine if your child advances the next grade or not. Results of the test will not determine any additional services you child may or may not receive. Results of the tests are broken down into subgroup testing to determine how subgroups (Asian/Pacific Islands, Black, Hispanic, American Indian, White, Other/Non Response, Free/Reduced Lunch, IEP, LEP) score. If one subgroup in a school fails, the whole school fails. And what does failure mean? If a school does not show improvement over a specified period of time, the school can become unaccredited and lose funding.

The MAP testing creates stress for students, teachers and administrators.  It will only get worse in the coming years.  MAP will be phased out but the constant assessments due to Common Core mandates (assessments given every three weeks) will create continual stress for students and teachers.  Now not only can money be withheld from schools, teacher and administrator jobs hinge on these assessment results.

How are teachers responding to testing this year?  In March, one Florida teacher made an 8th grade student wear a sign around his neck to punish him for missing an FCAT test even though he had provided a doctor's note regarding a sickness:

He even had this doctor's note to prove his illness was real, but said when he came back to school this week his teacher put a humiliating note around his neck. 

"It said, since I have decided that I will come to school today but I didn't come to school during the FACT."

Thomas claimed the teacher did nothing as classmates laughed. 

"She just made me feel like I'm worthless."

The teacher apologized but the mother stated:

"There is a zero tolerance policy for a student to bully each other. Well, how is there a no tolerance that they allow a teacher to bully a student," said Cancellare.  

Fast forward to April in Missouri.  From ky3.com and Washburn, MO:

 

(Video from youtube)

A mother is upset over over a classroom incident that left her kindergartner embarrassed. 

A 6-year-old girl had an accident in her classroom, and her parents are pushing for policy changes.

"They told me that the teacher had asked her to go to the restroom before testing time," said mother Lisa Skidmore.

Skidmore says asking a young child to go to the bathroom on demand is next to impossible.

"You can't do that to a 6-year-old."

 

That's why, when her kindergartner told her teacher she had to go to the restroom during the test and wasn't allowed, Skidmore couldn't believe it.  Her little girl couldn't hold it.

"They didn't even bother trying to clean her up or anything.  She still had poop, diarrhea poop, coming out the back, up her front, down her legs," she said.

Skidmore says her daughter was forced to sit in the class for the remainder of test time, about 15 minutes, then mom was called after the test, and it was a 20-minute drive to school to pick up her daughter.

All the while, the little girl had to sit in the mess.  No one bothered to clean her up, although a teacher did give her a trash bag to wrap around herself.
    
"You don't even treat a dog that way!" Skidmore said.

The last paragraph explains why the teacher handled it in this way:

Many kids right now are taking Missouri Assessment Program (MAP) tests, the state standardized testing required by law.  Those tests start in third grade, but the superintendent says the reason the teacher was sticking so closely to MAP testing guidelines, even for a kindergartner, is because she was trying to simulate the stringent rules to prepare students for what's to come.  (emphasis added)

What these teachers are doing by simulating stringent rules for kindergartners for what they are in store for will dull any love of learning these children might possess.  These teachers should be brought up on child abuse charges for the physical and emotional distress imparted to a 6 year old child.  The father's remarks are right on the money:

"If any parent sent their kid to school with crappy pants, diarrhea-type crap, wrapped up in a garbage bag, stench badly, I believe with all my heart those parents would be facing criminal charges, I believe that with all my heart."

 MAP Time.  It IS the "most terrible time of the year".  Just wait until the common core standards kick in and it will be high stakes not just in the spring...it will be your child's public school existence all year...and now, it will be starting in pre-school. 

Here is the AYP measurement from DESE from Southwest Elementary School in Washburn.  The teachers apparently are feeling the pressure to get the scores up as they are lagging behind the NCLB proficiency model.

It is time for parents to demand their local schools stop this madness.  Your children are not hostages, data subgroups and they should not be forced into these constant assessments.  From our previous posting on MAP testing:

To highlight some of the problems with this type of testing, I took a bit of liberty with the lyrics from "It's the Most Wonderful time of the Year". Here is Andy Williams singing the song on youtube. Play it while following along with our version about the dreaded MAP testing every spring:

It's the most terrible time of the year
With the kids all stressed out
And the teachers burned out
There's no one in good cheer
It's the most terrible time of the year

It's the most-most stressful season of all
With those bubbles to fill
With your pencil so near
Anxiety calls!
It's the most-most stressful season of all

There are instructions imparted
And students imploding
And tears all around the class
There are scary test questions
And stories to study
And answers the kids might not know

It's the most terrible time of the year
There are test preparations
All hearts will be pounding
When testing comes near
It's the most terrible time of the year

The results from the testing
Based on subset groupings
Determines the funding for schools
If the kids don't perform
The school flunks, it's a pity
It's AYP regs, don't you know?

It's the most terrible time of the year
There is much consternation
From districts awaiting
Results of the tests
It's the most terrible time
It's the most terrible time
It's the most terrible time....of the year

The Trouble With Data

Several weeks ago, I listened to our high school principal extol the virtues of data that they will use to "guide" every one of their decisions on how to run the school. They were already collecting buckets (my word) of data that would help them tailor the curriculum and teach to the needs of students. Decisions would not be based on anecdotal evidence, nor clouded by penchants to emotional responses. From the facts, the proper course would be clear. The data would keep the school on a course for continual improvement.

My ocular muscles got quite a work out that evening. I won't even cover the fact that his school has no ability to alter the curriculum. Neither does the district school board or, I'm beginning to believe, even DESE.

Touting the virtues of data seemed just a little too Madison Avenue for promoting the longitudinal database that is working its way into the educational landscape.

This data is something we want. It's something we need. It will make us better. Cooler. Whenever they ask for it, we should be only too happy to supply it to them. WE LOVE DATA!

I wonder what the principal would do with the data I have on my son. He struggled all last year in science, barely passing the course by the skin of his teeth. In fact, by the numerous test scores (data) he accumulated, it seemed clear that he was either not putting in the effort, or was just not able to grab the basic science concepts. This was so obvious, according to the data, that he was bumped off the advanced science track for the following year.

Imagine our surprise then when we received his MAP scores for science last week and found that his scale score put him 12 points above the minimum to be categorized as being in the top Advanced achievement level. According to the MAP folks this means he has a "thorough understanding of the content at this grade level." His Terra Nova score put him better than 80% of the students nation wide.

The MAP test is designed to assess each student's comprehension of the Show Me Standards and has been the benchmark against which teacher performance is measured in this state so we must assume that it is accurate, or at least close.

So here are two sets of well documented, publicly recognized data that are in complete contrast to one another. Decisions with long range implications were made based on at least one set of these data; that my son would no longer be on the honors track in science. The other set of data not only says he could hack honors science, but he might actually have a knack for it. Unfortunately, the decision about which high school science course he would take was made way back in February when scheduling requests were due and the MAP data was not available until 10 weeks into the new school year.

What conclusions can be drawn from the data? We could probably conclude that the difference is not due to test taking anxiety, otherwise both scores would be low. We could conclude that my son chose not to work in this teacher's class, but decided it was worth the effort to do well on the MAP test. I love my son, but I don't give him enough credit to think up that effort scenario.

We could guess that the teacher was not teaching to the test which, to some, may be a plus. My son could have performed poorly on the unique information she was teaching, but gleaned enough to pass the MAP test. This would mean, however, that she was trying to teach almost twice as much material as the other grade level science teacher. I'm all for pushing kids and striving for more educational exposure, but my son's grades (and those of many other parents of advanced students who had this teacher) would indicate that this teacher is not very good at covering so much material. Given that academic performance in this particular year pegs a child's long term high school course placement, this approach to teaching the subject should have been rejected.

It would be difficult, if not impossible, to get at the truth of this data at this point. No one is doing the type of data comparison or analysis that would be needed. Once a child leaves one school for another, nobody bothers to look at the data. The old school will choose to accept the MAP score because that data has actual cash value. The parents , unless they have another child rising through the ranks, will not push for an inquiry and simply be glad to shake the dust from that school off their shoes.

Contrary to what the high school principal claimed, the data used to determine course placement did not tell the whole story so proper conclusions were not reached. Nor will anyone ever get that teacher to adjust her lesson plans because no one is looking at the comparison of her kids' classroom scores versus MAP scores. Those kids are gone. The damage is done.

The more I read about the education machine in this country, the less I worry about these kinds of decisions. I quizzed my son prior to the science final and was satisfied that he knew the information. The MAP scores confirm that. The loss is only a year until he can get his confidence back. Then I am sure he could take on the honors track again if he chooses. The kids whose parents aren't paying attention, however, may be permanently lost to science.

So the principal will have to excuse me for yawing and rolling my eyes when he touted hiss school's reliance on data for their decisions. That is an addiction that will prove as useless or destructive as any other addiction.

Are "Fa Sho", "Crunk" and "Imma' " Accepted Vocabulary Words on the MAP Test? They are in the Ferguson Florissant School District.

If you are a regular reader of this blog you know we have questions regarding standardized testing, particularly the MAP test. Many districts have completed one week of the federally mandated tests, while other districts will be starting this week.

The Joplin Globe reports MAP is just starting in Joplin and how intensive the process of the annual testing has become:

At many local school districts, preparation for the MAP goes on all year. The test helps drive curriculum, and students have been taking practice tests throughout the year.

The MAP assesses students at various grade levels in communications arts and mathematics, and gives parents and educators a means to compare students across districts. State and federal agencies in turn use it to grade schools, with implications for accreditation at the state level and for compliance with the No Child Left Behind Act at the federal level.

“It’s a high-stakes test,” Joplin Superintendent C.J. Huff said.


It is high-stakes in terms of the school's point of view since it can affect accreditation and compliance for NCLB; and how do the schools respond to this pressure? The Globe reports:

West Central Elementary School offered a weekly “boot camp” for its students over several weeks, said Denise Legore, the school’s principal. The students, dubbed “privates,” are led by community members and mentors with either the rank of “sergeant” or “lieutenant.” The children sang in marching cadences and this year wore dog tags. They negotiated an obstacle course where they have to answer a question in order to move on.

I thought this was a bit odd. Children singing in marching cadences to prepare for a test? It apparently doesn't happen just in Joplin. It's happening in the Ferguson-Florissant School District as well. I received this question from a mother of a third grader in that district about the "Map Walk" sheet sent home with her child (you can find the words to the "Map Walk" at the beginning of this article):

Someone please read this and tell me what the heck is going on at my child's school. What kind of grammar is this? And why are they teaching my child this? ....and what does "crunk" mean?


I was stunned at the sheet she referenced. There were misspellings, incorrect grammar, and rap slang being taught to students. I looked up the definition of "crunk"in an online rap dictionary:

adjective

crunk

1. To have a good time. Long as everybody get crunk in the drop -- Lil Bow Wow (Bounce with me [2000].
2. To get crazy drunk. Originally, this term comes from the words crazy and funk. As opposed to popular opinion, crunk has had no relation to being coked up and drunk until recently. Because if its similarity of terminal sound with the word drunk many rappers have used it in reference with being crazy and under the influence. This and the intrinsical association with hard partying has brought about its association with alcohol.
3. A style of music most commonly made by rap artists from the southern states, aka the Dirty South. Some crunk artists (or groups) are Lil' Jon, Pitbull, Lil' Scrappy, Trillville, and David Bannerand also [[[lil'joe the prince of Crunk]] n N b o Crunkmusic
4. At a high level, as in volume: "He got the speakers in the trunk with the bass on crunk." (Mos Def, from "Mr. Nigga" on Black on Both Sides).

I doubt many mothers of 3rd graders would be elated to see this come home in their child's backpack. This mom has contacted the superintendent and the State Board of Education to determine if this is accepted educational practice.

I wonder how "boot camp" for MAP preparation is received in Joplin. I hope the cadences used there (I'm still trying to come to terms with this technique) are grammatically correct and don't teach 3rd graders street jive (courtesy of the Urban Dictionary). Maybe that concerned mother should have her student do the "Map Walk" right out of the classroom when testing time comes around.

Parents AND Bloggers Challenge Standardized Testing

A reader alerted me to a group of parents concerned about the standardized testing their children are allegedly mandated to take by their individual states. This is what she reported from Florida and Texas:

Here in Florida, there are consequences for not taking the test. The student does not go to the next grade level or is given an plan as if a disabled student. Keep a child home because of the testing is an unexcused absence, which also has consequences. In Texas, parents report that unexcused absences come with a court date for contributing to the truancy of a minor, $500 a day penalty, and a truant officer.

She invited me to join the Facebook group, "Parents Against Standardized Testing". There are many articles from around the country about parents concerned about these mandates (which may not actually be legal mandates in some states) and if you are concerned about this issue, access this site. Check out the discussion board on the site as well.

Althouse posted "Bloggers Challenge President on Standardized Testing":

Mr. Obama criticized “high-stakes” tests last week at a town-hall-style meeting, contrasting them with less-pressured tests his daughters took in their Washington private school....

Anthony Cody, a teacher in Oakland, Calif., who writes a blog for Education Week, suggested that the president was disavowing the policies of his education secretary, Arne Duncan, which include expanding student testing to evaluate teachers and developing new tests to be given several times a year to measure student progress.

Cody writes:

...The Obama campaign relied on the energy of millions of us, activated by a call to our hopes and dreams. We were exhausted by eight years of Bush, seven years of No Child Left Behind, and Obama promised a fresh start. We have not seen that fresh start in education. Instead we are seeing a deep entrenchment on the part of the Department of Education, finding ever more creative ways to pretend that making the tests more frequent will somehow make them benign. Those of us who are experiencing the effects of these policies are not deceived. We see how they are destroying schools, and stealing opportunities from children....

Last week, President Obama reminded us all why his election gave many of us so much hope. In 338 words he spoke of how he wanted his daughters, Sasha and Malia, to have their learning tested. He described a low-stakes, low pressure environment, with the results used not to punish them, their teachers or their school, but simply to find out what their strengths are, and where they might need extra support. He spoke of the need to avoid teaching to the test, and the value of engaging projects that would make students excited about learning. President Obama has made sure his daughters can learn this way. If only Department of Education policies would allow students in our public schools this same privilege!

Be sure to read the goldmine quotes from the readers. Apparently taxpayers ARE paying attention and are tired of the billions of dollars wasted on programs that don't work and don't educate children. As one reader wrote:

The Dept. of Education does what again?

Can You Find the Statute Mandating Student Compliance?

A parent in the Cape Girardeau School District asked if she could opt her child out of MAP testing. According to DESE, the answer was students may not be excused from the collective testing. Here is the story from KFVS:

According to the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, the test is a must.

"Based on No Child Left Behind, opting out of the MAP test is not an option," said Pat Fanger, assistant superintendent for Cape Girardeau Public Schools.

Accessing the DESE website under "MAP Test Information for Parents", here is the only information I could find about the testing mandates:

What is the Outstanding Schools Act?

The MAP assessments are required under Senate Bill 380, often referred to as the "Outstanding Schools Act," the state school-reform law enacted in legislature in 1993. This bill required the State Board of Education to adopt no more than 75 academic performance standards, which established the knowledge, skills and competencies necessary for students to "successfully advance through the public elementary and secondary education system of this state; lead to or qualify a student for high school graduation; and prepare students for postsecondary education or the workplace or both." These "Show-Me Standards" are guides to what students should be able to know and to do. There are 40 knowledge standards and 33 performance standards.

Linking onto the "Outstanding Schools Act", I can't find any language mandating Missouri students to take the MAP test. The legislation directs DESE in ITS legal requirements but I can't find legislation directing parents to make their child accountable to the school for this test.

Check out the No Child Left Behind website also listed on the DESE site and try to find the language which mandates students take the MAP test. I can't find that mandate or legislation in there either.

Do you think Debbie Jaco of Cape Girardeau will be put in jail if her daughter is not available for the MAP testing? Can DESE produce the specific legislation that states a taxpayer is legally mandated as a public school parent to force his/her child to take a test that doesn't determine whether he/she passes or fails a subject or a school year?

If you have the specific legislation either from the state or federal government with this mandate as it relates to individual students, please let us know. Reread this sentence again:

"Based on No Child Left Behind, opting out of the MAP test is not an option," said Pat Fanger, assistant superintendent for Cape Girardeau Public Schools.

Opting out of the MAP test may not be an option for schools, but as of now, I cannot find language which is directed to individual students.

Autonomy vs Acquiescing: A Tale of Two Superintendents. One Requests Map Test Waivers, One Requests Common Curriculum

This is an article about the Springfield District requesting to opt out its students from the MAP testing, and instead, replace it with Performance Series Examinations. The superintendent (Dr. Norman Ridder) believes this alternate set of tests gives quicker response which allows more immediate feedback for classroom teachers.

We wrote yesterday about Federal Government control over states and districts in educational mandates and spending. Springfield's superintendent must go to the state who then must file a waiver and wait for a decision from the Department of Education. If the DOE turns down the waiver, then the district must administer the MAP. Even if Ridder and DESE believe an alternate test would work better for a district, they basically have no power over the decision of the Federal level. (Just asking: Where in the Constitution is the Federal Government given authority over the states in educational decisions?) How much more obvious does it need to be to taxpayers and legislators that local control does not exist in education?

What does DESE think about the waiver idea? According to the Commissioner:

Springfield’s system gets a favorable opinion from one of the state’s top education officials. Chris Nicastro, commissioner of education for DESE, called the MAP a “snapshot” test that doesn’t provide results in a timely manner. “If you find out something isn’t working, you want to know that right away so that you can make the change immediately,” Nicastro said during a Springfield appearance Tuesday. “You don’t wait until your end of year report to say that something didn’t work 10, 11 or 12 months ago. If you did, your business would be in trouble and your board of directors would probably be on your back. “In education, that’s kind of what we’ve got. So I think we need to talk more about an assessment system that really informs instruction and gives us the kind of real-time information we need to make adjustments.”

The Joplin School District does not want to follow Springfield's lead; Joplin Superintendent Huff believes the MAP is sufficient:

C.J. Huff, superintendent of the Joplin School District, said the district will likely keep using the MAP because it helps the district gauge how its students perform when compared to other districts.

Testing decisions should be under a superintendent's purview. One aspect of education traditionally left to districts under state law is curriculum decisions. What is surprising are Huff's following statements regarding curriculum based on Arne Duncan's statements about education:

“This law has created dozens of ways for schools to fail and very few ways to help them succeed,” Duncan told Congress this week. “We should get out of the business of labeling schools as failures and create a new law that is fair and flexible, and focused on the schools and students most at risk.”

Huff said that preliminary buzz over what such a new law would look like would be to develop a nationwide set of curriculum standards upon which tests could be based. Currently, every state has its own set of standards. But Huff said a consortium of different states is forming to come up with a common core curriculum.

“We’re not getting an apples to apples comparison,” Huff said. “We all need to get on the same page and grow and learn from another.” (emphasis added)

Apparently Superintendent Huff wants to share a common core curriculum...not just common core standards or assessments, but a common core curriculum. Last time I researched this issue, a common curriculum was illegal and individual school districts were given the freedom to set their own curricula. How can a superintendent support a common curriculum when it is illegal?

One superintendent wants to practice district autonomy in MAP testing and another superintendent wants to jump on the bandwagon of a nationalized common curriculum. When did the control of the Federal government become so invasive that districts have to ask for permission to ask if it can use a particular test? Conversely, when did some superintendents believe (and accept) that the Federal Government has the legal authority to set curriculum frameworks which lead to a nationalized curriculum?

Tomorrow: do parents have the legal authority to opt their child out of MAP testing? Or do they need a waiver from the Federal Government as well?

MAP Testing: "It's the Most Terrible Time of the Year"...(with Apologies to Andy Williams)

HO! HO! HO! It's MAP testing time in Missouri. From what I've learned by reading and listening to those involved with testing, it is a dreaded time of the year for school districts due to the high stakes of students not performing well. The stakes won't affect the students in their school records but results can make a huge difference in districts in terms of funding. To highlight some of the problems with this type of testing, I took a bit of liberty with the lyrics from "It's the Most Wonderful time of the Year". Here is Andy Williams singing the song on youtube. Play it while following along with our version about the dreaded MAP testing every spring:

It's the most terrible time of the year
With the kids all stressed out
And the teachers burned out
There's no one in good cheer
It's the most terrible time of the year

It's the most-most stressful season of all
With those bubbles to fill
With your pencil so near
Anxiety calls!
It's the most-most stressful season of all

There are instructions imparted
And students imploding
And tears all around the class
There are scary test questions
And stories to study
And answers the kids might not know

It's the most terrible time of the year
There are test preparations
All hearts will be pounding
When testing comes near
It's the most terrible time of the year

The results from the testing
Based on subset groupings
Determines the funding for schools
If the kids don't perform
The school flunks, it's a pity
It's AYP regs, don't you know?

It's the most terrible time of the year
There is much consternation
From districts awaiting
Results of the tests
It's the most terrible time
It's the most terrible time
It's the most terrible time....of the year

Opting out of MAP testing in various states is a hot topic in Education on the internet. We'll be talking about MAP testing requirements in Missouri the next several days. We'll try to determine if in fact your child is legally required to take the test.

Do you know the purpose of the test? The MAP test is used to determine how the school is performing. Results of the test will not determine if your child advances the next grade or not. Results of the test will not determine any additional services you child may or may not receive. Results of the tests are broken down into subgroup testing to determine how subgroups (Asian/Pacific Islands, Black, Hispanic, American Indian, White, Other/Non Response, Free/Reduced Lunch, IEP, LEP) score. If one subgroup in a school fails, the whole school fails. And what does failure mean? If a school does not show improvement over a specified period of time, the school can become unaccredited and lose funding.

The MAP testing creates stress for students, teachers and administrators. Why do schools have to undergo such an ordeal? MAP scores allegedly determine how students are performing and money can be withheld based on results. I am receiving conflicting information if your child is legally required to take the MAP testing in Missouri. It is clearer in other states if students are required to show up or are allowed to opt out, and students in other states are not showing up for MAP testing this year.

Can you keep your child home this year so he/she won't have to undergo testing that makes no difference for your child individually but harms the collective group because of federal mandates in "No Child Left Behind"? Call DESE at 573.751.4212 and ask the department these questions:

• Do "No Child Left Behind" mandates legally require students to take MAP tests?
• If such a mandate exists, can DESE produce the specific clause?
• Is there a specific clause that does not allow parents to opt out?
• If such a clause denying opt out exists, can DESE produce the clause?

If DESE cannot produce the requested information and you do not feel the necessity to make your child take these tests which have no impact on his/her report card, you need to decide on your next course of action. Parents in Missouri and other states are beginning to question whether the MAP testing has become more of a bullying tactic to make AYP goals for a school to satisfy the Department of Education rules based on no legislation to back up this tactic.

Tomorrow we'll be writing about a Missouri school district that has filed to exempt itself from MAP testing. Apparently it's had enough of experiencing "the most terrible time of the year".